India Backs Russia's "Legitimate Interests" In Ukraine

On Thursday a senior Indian official appeared to endorse Russia’s position in Ukraine in recent days, even as Delhi urged all parties involved to seek a peaceful resolution to the diplomatic crisis.

When asked for India’s official assessment of the events in Ukraine, National Security Adviser Shivshankar Menon responded:

“We hope that whatever internal issues there are within Ukraine are settled peacefully, and the broader issues of reconciling various interests involved, and there are legitimate Russian and other interests involved…. We hope those are discussed, negotiated and that there is a satisfactory resolution to them.”

The statement was made on the same day that Crimea’s parliament voted to hold a referendum for secession from Ukraine.

Local Indian media noted that Menon’s statement about Russia’s legitimate interests in Ukraine made it the first major nation to publicly lean toward Russia. As my colleague Shannon has reported throughout the week, many of China’s public statements could be interpreted as backing Russia in Ukraine, despite Beijing’s own concerns about ethnic breakaway states and its principle of non-interference.

However, at other times, including at the UN Security Council, Beijing has appeared to be subtly rebuking Moscow by suggesting that its unilateral paththreatened regional and global stability. At the very least, however, Beijing has characteristically not gone as far as the U.S. and the West in publicly scolding Vladimir Putin for the military intervention in Crimea.

Ukraine certainly appeared to interpret India’s endorsement of Russia’s legitimate interests as far more hostile than Beijing’s position on Russia’s actions. According to the Telegraph India, a Ukrainian embassy spokesperson stationed in Delhi responded to Menon’s comments by saying: “We are not sure how Russia can be seen having legitimate interests in the territory of another country. In our view, and in the view of much of the international community, this is a direct act of aggression and we cannot accept any justification for it.”

The larger question, of course, is why India decided to take such a relatively pro-Russian stance on the Ukraine issue? There are a number of possibilities.

First, India and Russia have long-standing ties and Moscow is Delhi’s top arms provider. Moreover, Russia and the former Soviet Union has been nearly alone in the international community in continue to back India during crucial moments suchas following its 1974 and 1998 nuclear tests.

It’s also possible that Delhi believes Russia’s intervention offers the best chance of stabilizing Ukraine. India’s Foreign Ministry on Thursday also released a statement noting that there are “more than 5,000 Indian nationals, including about 4,000 students, in different parts of Ukraine.” At the same time, India’s overall interest in Ukraine is fairly negligible—certainly less than China’s, for instance—and thus Delhi might assess that it has more to gain by publicly sticking by Moscow at a time when it desperately needs support.

India also has plenty of interests in certain regions along its peripheral, and at certain times—such as during the Sri Lanka Civil War—has intervened to protect various societal groups with strong ties to India. Unlike China, then, India may assess it has an interest in an international precedent in which major powers can intervene in countries along their borders. At the same time, such an international precedent could be used by Pakistan to justify intervening in Kashmir.

Telegraph India offers another reason.According to the report cited above, Indian officials have told Telegraph India that, in the newspaper’s words, Delhi is “convinced that the West’s tacit support for a series of attempted coups against democratically elected governments — in Egypt, Thailand and now Ukraine — has only weakened democratic roots in these countries.”

This rationale would be consistent with India’s long-standing, deep-seated abhorrence to anything that merely resembles Western imperialism. At the same time, India has not historically made supporting democracy abroad a central tenet of its foreign policy.More in-roads in East Ukraine made by pro- russian protesters.....

Another East-Ukraine City Falls To Pro-Russian Protesters As Ukraine Denies Sending Troops To Crimea

Despite clear evidence otherwise, presented here extensively yesterday, this morning Ukraine has denied that is has "plans to send armed forces to Crimea" and instead Ukrainian troops are performing "training exercises" in base, Interfax news agency quoted Acting Defence Minister Ihor Tenyukh as saying on Sunday. Responding to media speculation about Ukrainian military movements after Russian forces took control of Crimea, Tenyukh said the only troop movements that might be seen would be from one base to another to take part in the training exercises. "No movements, no departures for Crimea by the armed forces are foreseen. They are doing their routine work which the armed have always had," he said. Right, and Russia just happened to launch an ICBM as a "drill" in the middle of the greatest Cold War re-escalation in 30 years.

Adding somewhat to the confusion was the statement by Pavlo Shysholin, head of country’s border guard service tells reporters in Kiev, who said that so far Ukrainian border guards denied entry to 3,500 people and that Ukraine border troops remain in Crimea, would leave only if "forced" but more importantly:

UKRAINE BORDER TROOPS BOOST FORCES ON EAST BORDER: SHYSHOLIN

So there is an escalation in the mobilization, only not toward Crimea, which the Russians already control entirely, but the critical East, which as everyone knows, is the next target for Putin annexation once the Crimean referendum passes in one week.

Confirming just this were just released photos from another major city in east Ukraine, this time Lugansk, where pro-Russian protesters just stormed and took over the city administration building. Their demand: to be part of the March 16 referendum to become part of Russia.

A clip of the latest peaceful pro-Russian takeover via LifeNews:

Lugansk's location in context:

And so one by one, the cities in east Ukraine are slipping away to Russia, even as Obama continues his Key Largo vacation and makes the occasional phone call.

How is this an indication of reality? Well, for one, as we reported previously, the one country that has the most to lose from Russian sanctions, Germany, and specifically its industrial superlobby has already said "Nein" to any truly crippling trade blockade of Moscow would backfire on Germany's own economy and bottom line.

But what about London? Here, the NYT explains why, once again, it was all about the money, and why were right even when we were being humorous:

The White House has imposed visa restrictions on some Russian officials, and President Obama has issued an executive order enabling further sanctions. But Britain has already undermined any unified action by putting profit first.

It boils down to this: Britain is ready to betray the United States to protect the City of London’s hold on dirty Russian money. And forget about Ukraine.

At this point, in standing with the ideological framework of the host media outlet, the author takes a detour into naive idealism - a world in which it is not money that talks, but a declining global superpower, whose hypocrisy has been exposed time and again, and where extinct words like "mission" and "moral" are used with reckless abandon:

Britain, open for business, no longer has a “mission.” Any moralizing remnant of the British Empire is gone; it has turned back to the pirate England of Sir Walter Raleigh.Britain’s ruling class has decayed to the point where its first priority is protecting its cut of Russian money — even as Russian armored personnel carriers rumble around the streets of Sevastopol. But the establishment understands that, in the 21st century, what matters are banks, not tanks.

The Russians also understand this. They know that London is a center of Russian corruption, that their loot plunges into Britain’s empire of tax havens — from Gibraltar to Jersey, from the Cayman Islands to the British Virgin Islands — on which the sun never sets.

British residency is up for sale. “Investor visas” can be purchased, starting at £1 million ($1.6 million). London lawyers in the Commercial Court now get 60 percent of their work from Russian and Eastern European clients. More than 50 Russia-based companies swell the trade at London’s Stock Exchange. The planning regulations have been scrapped, and along the Thames, up go spires of steel and glass for the hedge-funding class.

Britain’s bright young things now become consultants, art dealers, private banker and hedge funders. Or, to put it another way, the oligarchs’ valets.

Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, gets it: you pay them, you own them. Mr. Putin was absolutely certain that Britain’s managers — shuttling through the revolving door between cabinet posts and financial boards — would never give up their fees and commissions from the oligarchs’ billions. He was right.

So, let us get this straight? It is great when the Russian oligrachs "invest" their stolen money in luxury London real estate, the FTSE100, and various other inflating assets which are mistaken for an improvement in the broader "economy", but when the alarm clock of realpolitick rings, it was all bad?

What we are more stunned by is that while London has at least figured out the quid pro quo, the US, and its leader, so far seem completely incapable of doing so. Perhaps someone should explain to Obama that with the Fed tapering, the only incremental buyer of high end real estate are precisely the oligarchs from Russia, whom he will soon alienate, as well as those from China, which also may decide it is too risky to park "hot money" in New York triplexes, and instead once again, like in 2011, park it all in gold and other precious metals.

But going back to the NYT article, the author does make the following accurate observation: "This is Britain’s growth business today: laundering oligarchs’ dirty billions, laundering their dirty reputations."

His conclusion, too, is spot on:

The Shard encapsulates the new hierarchy of the city. On the top floors, “ultra high net worth individuals” entertain escorts in luxury apartments. By day, on floors below, investment bankers trade incomprehensible derivatives.

Come nightfall, the elevators are full of African cleaners, paid next to nothing and treated as nonexistent. The acres of glass windows are scrubbed by Polish laborers, who sleep four to a room in bedsit slums. And near the Shard are the immigrants from Lithuania and Romania, who broke their backs on construction sites, but are now destitute and whiling away their hours along the banks of the Thames.

The Shard is London, a symbol of a city where oligarchs are celebrated and migrants are exploited but that pretends to be a multicultural utopia. Here, in their capital city, the English are no longer calling the shots. They are hirelings.

Still think Putin is ready to "blink"?

Russia today

Sunday, March 9, 2014

Ukraine Post Revolution Updates - Focus on Crime Re-Revolution --

As Crime moves toward its March 16 , 2014 Referendum concerning

joining the Russian Federation , rallies in support of vote continue in

Crimea and rallies in favor of Russian intervention occur in Eastern

Ukraine ......... The new Ukrainian government continues to take

actions to deter the vote occurring - the latest step being blocking the

electronic system of Crimea's Treasury and freezing the Autonomy

accounts ( state pensions not affected for now , Crimean Authorities

to be imposed on Kiev coup government ( to accompany planned

pension cuts of up to fifty percent for working pensioners ) ........ Anti-

fascist march activists were shot minutes after their protest finished

in Kharkov, Ukraine, LifeNews and Glagol reported. A bus with ten

people inside stopped and began shooting at the activists. The men

then came closer and reportedly began beating the activists. Three

people were injured, one of whom sustained a gunshot wound in his

back ...... The EU and US still conferring ( by phone ) to come up

with a strategy that will slow down the referendum tide in Crimea ,

Eastern European countries and the US support strong sanctions

against Russia while Germany , France , Italy and UK adverse to

imposing meaningful Russia sanctions.....

Today's headlines......

http://rt.com/news/kiev-clashes-rioters-police-571/

Sunday, March 9

13:17 GMT:

Thousands anti-Maidan demonstrators rallying in the eastern Ukrainian city of Lugansk have blocked and occupied the regional administration building, hoisting a Russian flag on its top. The protesters are demanding Mikhail Bolotskikh, the region’s head, picked by coup-imposed Kiev government, to step down.According to Itar-Tass, some 3,000 people are taking part in the Lugansk protests and about 1,000 have broken inside the building.

Before the takeover, pro-Russian demonstrators reportedly clashed with Euromaidan activists demonstrating near a monument to Ukrainian poet, Taras Shevchenko, whose 200th birthday is celebrated this Sunday.

13:05 GMT:

One “does not talk in the language of sanctions in the modern world,” special representative of the Russian President at Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), Kirill Barsky, said in a statement published on the Russian Foreign Ministry’s website.“In today’s world, which is connected through and through by the binding fabric of globalization, the very idea of international isolation of a large state, let alone that of a world power, should a priori be perceived by any reasonable man as an obvious oddity,” Barsky said.

12:55 GMT:

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, and his German counterpart, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, have discussed the situation in Ukraine over the phone and ways of solving the current crisis there, according to a statement, issued by the Russian Foreign Ministry.

12:40 GMT:

Ukrainian Railways (UZ) have stopped selling tickets to trains going to Crimea, according to an official statement on the company’s website. UZ have given an assurance that those who had already bought tickets will be able to reach their destination. However, it was not immediately clear if and when the railway routes would be resumed and in service again.As of Sunday, Russian Railways (RZD) are still selling tickets to Crimea.Crimean Vice-Premier Rustam Temirgaliev told Interfax that the authorities are expecting that some additional railway traffic to and from Russia will be ferried over the Kerch Strait. A bridge connecting Kerch and Russia’s Krasnodar Region is also being built “at a rapid pace,” he said.

Seven thousand pro-Russian protesters have gathered in the center of Donetsk, southeast Ukraine, to demand a referendum on the status of the Donetsk region and the release of the “People’s Governor”, Pavel Gubarev, Interfax reports.

Russia is ready to support Crimean industrial enterprises financially, according to deputy head of the Russian parliament’s committee for the industrial sector, Pavel Dorokhin.“The Russian government has allocated a big sum of money, around 40bln rubles ($1.1bln), to support the Crimean industrial and economic infrastructure,” Dorokhin told Interfax. “Our priority is support for enterprises of military-industrial complex, machinery manufacturing, maintenance of vessels, including those of the Russian Black Sea fleet.”

11:45 GMT:

Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniuk said on Sunday he would go to the US this week to discuss the standoff with Russia over Ukraine's southern region of Crimea.

"I am going to the United States to hold top-level meetings on resolving the situation unfolding in our bilateral and multilateral relations," Yatseniuk said at the start of a government meeting in the Ukrainian capital, Kiev.

He did not immediately give any dates and provided no other details of the visit. (Reuters)

11:17 GMT:

Several thousand people have gathered in the center of the Crimean capital, Simferopol, for a rally in support of the region joining Russia, Itar-Tass reports.

Around 10,000 people have taken part in a rally in support of Ukraine in Maikop, in the Russian Republic of Adygea, local police report, as cited by Interfax.

08:54 GMT:

Ukraine’s self-imposed authorities have blocked the electronic system of Crimea’s treasury and frozen the autonomy’s accounts, said Crimean Deputy PM Rustam Temirgaliyev. However, he says this will not affect state payments like pensions, Interfax reports.

“We are now quickly opening accounts in Russian banks, including ruble accounts. People won’t have to go without pensions; the situation is under control,” he said, adding that local authorities will prevent any “catastrophic consequences” of Kiev’s recent move.

08:52 GMT:

Konstantin Dolgov, the Russian Foreign Ministry’s commissioner for human rights in his twitter uged western politicians not to let the leader of the Ukrainian ultra nationalist group “Right Sector”, Dmitry Yarosh, come to power.

“De-facto authorities in Kiev and their western patrons must block the access to power for neo nazi Yarosh and his backers,” Dolgov wrote.

08:45 GMT:

Five regional heads of police have been dismissed by Ukrainian Interior Minister Arsen Avakov, who announced the decision on his Facebook page. Those fired include Igor Avrutsky, the head of the Crimean police.

08:34 GMT:

According to estimates by Crimean authorities, two thirds of the region’s residents could vote in favor of joining Russia. RT’s Paula Slier went to Crimea’s capital, Simferopol, to collect opinionson the issue from people in the streets.

06:55 GMT:

Rallies in support of Ukraine and Russians living there will be held in a number of Russian cities on March 9 and 10. According to organizers, cited by Itar-Tass, around 30,000 people will take part. Rallies are expected to take place in Astrakhan, Pskov, Arkhangelsk, Chelyabinsk, Vologda, Perm and Chita.

06:52 GMT:

The Ukrainian coup-imposed government has announced its officials are subject to austerity cuts. The measure is “aimed at stabilizing the economic situation in the country as well as for saving and rational use of government funds,” the Ukrainian cabinet of ministers’ online statement reads. Austerity cuts are announced for government bodies and many kinds of state-sponsored enterprises and organizations. They have been ordered to stop buying cars (except ambulance, fire-fighting and rescue vehicles), furniture, mobile phones, laptops, etc. Charter flights and phone calls will no longer be reimbursed from the budget. Government officials will see their allowances cut.

Saturday, March 8

23:12 GMT:

The anti-fascist march activists were shot minutes after their protest finished in Kharkov, Ukraine, LifeNews and Glagol reported. A bus with ten people inside stopped and began shooting at the activists. The men then came closer and reportedly began beating the activists. Three people were injured, one of whom sustained a gunshot wound in his back.

A rally on Kharkov's central square in support for ethnic Russians living in Crimea, on Saturday. (Screenshot from Ruptly video)

A rally on Kharkov's central square in support for ethnic Russians living in Crimea, on Saturday. (Screenshot from Ruptly video)

22:31 GMT:

US President Barack Obama and French President Francois Hollande agreed in a phone conversation on Saturday to establish a contact group to help settle the Ukrainian crisis, which will require Russian consent. In case this does not work out, the West will be forced to introduce new measures that will "have a substantial impact on relations between the international community and Russia,” ITAR-TASS quoted the the Elysee Palace as saying.

“In the current serious circumstances, they stressed the importance for Russia to accept the formation of a contact group for initiating dialogue between Ukraine and Russia, in order to promote a peaceful way out of the crisis promptly and fully restore the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine,” Elysee Palace added.

22:11 GMT:

Around 3,000 people attended a rally on Kharkov's central square to voice support for ethnic Russians living in Crimea, on Saturday, Ruptly news agency reports. A heavy police presence was seen on the square, where they guarded the city hall and regional administration buildings.

Protesters chanted slogans such as "Russia-Russia", "Kharkiv-Kharkiv", and "Fascism will not pass".

Organizers of the rally voiced their willingness to protect Kharkiv from Kiev's new interim authorities. Organizers also stated they want to stop 'Bandera fascists from Kiev', and reinstate relations with 'brotherly Russia'.

The deployments come just a week before the planned Crimean referendum on secession from the Ukraine. Russia is backing the referendum, and Russian parliament has expressed support for annexing Crimea should the voters demand it.

The Ukraine interim government, itself only installed a couple of weeks ago, has condemned the referendum as an “inexcusable provocation,” and insists that they will never give up control of the Crimea, no matter what the Crimeans themselves say.

Ultimately, they may not have a choice. Rhetoric of invasion aside, the Russian deployment has effectively precluded Ukraine’s much smaller military, deeply divided by recent regime change, trying to reconquer the Crimea militarily. Many have already defected to Crimea’s own fledgling military, and once the referendum passes, which is all but assured by the ethnic Russian majority in the peninsula, it will be a fait accompli.

Israeli envoy opens 'hotline' with Ukrainian ultra-nationalist

Israel’s ambassador in Kiev, Reuven Din El, opened a hotline with a Ukrainian ultra-nationalist movement to “prevent provocations,” according to an agreement reached last week.

The agreement came at the end of a meeting between Din El and Dmitry Yarosh, the leader of the Right Sector paramilitary group, which participated in the overthrow of the government of President Viktor Yanukovych.

In the meeting, “Dmitry Yarosh stressed that Right Sector will oppose all [racist] phenomena, especially anti-Semitism, with all legitimate means,” the embassy wrote on its website.

“The parties agreed to establish a ‘hotline’ to prevent provocations and coordinate on issues as they arise,” it said.

Yarosh’s troops had a decisive role in the revolution that forced Yanukovych to flee to Russia.

Last month he told the Ukrainian Pravda newspaper that his outfit shares many beliefs with the xenophobic Svoboda party and cooperates with it, but rejects the xenophobia displayed by Svoboda members and leaders.

“We have a lot of common positions on ideological issues, but there are big differences. For example, I do not understand racist elements and I do not adopt them,” he said.

Yarosh said that “non-Ukrainians” should be treated according to principles set forth by Ukrainian nationalist leader Stepan Bandera.

A one-time ally of Nazi Germany who later turned against the Nazis, Bandera said non-Ukrainian allies should be treated as brothers and neutral parties should be respected.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center and other Jewish organizations have condemned the glorification in Ukraine of Bandera, whose troops are believed to have killed thousands of Jews

when they were allies of the Nazis in 1941.

Svoboda lawmakers have regularly used the pejorative “zhyd,” which is equivalent to “kike,” to describe Jews.

In response to protests from Jewish leaders, Svoboda argued “zhyd” was a correct and neutral, albeit archaic term. Svoboda’s leader, Oleh Tyahnybok, has in the past referred to a “Moscow-Jewish mafia” which he said ruled Ukraine.

Din El and Tyahnybok spoke in March 2013 in a meeting which the Israeli foreign ministry said was not coordinated with Jerusalem.

China Backs Russia on Ukraine

Despite its principle of non-interference, domestic and international interests have Beijing siding with Moscow.

Chinese media has covered the evolving situation in Ukraine with interest, in part because China has avested interest in Ukraine’s fate. Now, the world is returning the scrutiny. In the wake of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decision to send troops to the Crimean Peninsula, it seems the world is taking sides on the Ukrainian issue. And everyone wants to know where China stands—one of the perils of being a major power.

On Sunday, after the Russian Federation Council authorized the use of armed forces in Ukraine, Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesman Qin Gang issued a special statement on the situation. “China is deeply concerned about the current situation in Ukraine,” Qin said. He called on “the relevant parties in Ukraine to resolve their internal disputes peacefully within the legal framework.” As for external interference in the Ukraine, Qin emphasized that China respects “the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine” and said that a solution should be found “based on respect for international law and norms.”

However, Qin also cryptically said that “there are reasons for why the situation in Ukraine is what it is today.” Qin didn’t go into detail about what those reasons might be, but Chinese media sources offered some suggestions. A Xinhua commentary argued that the West’s “biased mediation has polarized Ukraine and only made things worse in the country.” The article said that the West should work together with Russia to find a solution, and “stop trying to exclude Russia from the political crisis they failed to mediate.”

Further, the Xinhua commentary had no criticism for Russia’s decision to send troops to Crimea. “It is quite understandable when Putin said his country retained the right to protect its interests and Russian-speakers living in Ukraine,” the commentary said. Rather than opposing the move, the West should “respect Russia’s unique role in mapping out the future of Ukraine.”

The Global Times took a realist (and cynical) view of the situation, arguing that “the Ukrainian situation shows us clearly that in the international political arena, principles are decided by power.” The article argued that the Ukrainian opposition and the pro-Yanukovych, pro-Russian elements both only seem to gain legitimacy after they are able to assert their dominance. The article came to a rather strange conclusion: comparing the situation in the Ukraine to the “double standards” Washington applies to U.S.-China relations. “There is no logic” in those arguments (presumably referring to U.S. human rights critiques of China), “only that the U.S. is still the more powerful player.”

The juxtaposition of U.S.-China relations with the Ukraine crisis helps clarify China’s position. It’s hard to see how Russian troops entering Crimea meshes with China’s principle of non-interference, not to mention Beijing’s avowed respect for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. However, China is far from the only nation to bend its principles in favor of realpolitik. Denouncing Putin’s decision to send troops to Ukraine would jeopardize the evolving partnership between Beijing and Moscow. Worse, standing against Moscow would mean China was standing with the West—which could be taken as implicit support for the Ukrainian opposition forces that ousted President Viktor Yanukovych.

Meanwhile, China is leery of “color revolutions,” including Ukraine’s own “Orange Revolution” in 2004. The Chinese government has long speculated that the “color revolutions” were instigated by Western nations to oust unfriendly regimes—and Beijing itself remains wary that the U.S. is trying to foment another color revolution within China. Many in China now argue that Ukraine’s “Orange Revolution” papered over fissures that are springing to the forefront in the current tensions. To Beijing, Western intervention (both 10 years ago and today) is directly responsible for the current violence.

As a result, China has decided to back Russia—at least according to Russia’s Foreign Ministry. The Voice of Russia, citing a FM statement, said that Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi had a telephone conversation Monday wherein they noted “the coincidence of Russia’s and China’s positions on the situation in Ukraine.”

China’s own Foreign Ministry Spokesman Qin Gang was a bit more circumspect in his Monday press conference. “China upholds its own diplomatic principles and the basic codes for international relations,” Qin said. However, he added that “we have also taken the historical and contemporary factors of the Ukraine issue into consideration.” In others words, Qin said, China stands fast to its principles while also “seeking truth from facts” (实事求是).

China’s ambiguous position reveals its dilemma. Beijing’s instinct is to back Moscow, both to uphold the fruitful cooperation between these two nations and to stand firm against pressure from the West. However, vocally supporting Russia would violate China’s principle of non-interference. More importantly, it could arguably set a precedent of Chinese support for military intervention to protect separatists unhappy with their government—which goes against all China’s instincts, given its own issues with Tibet and Xinjiang provinces. Yet as the Global Times put it, at the end of the day power calculations mean more than principles. China’s geopolitical strategy requires Beijing to at least tacitly support Russia, and at the end of the day that argument outweighs more abstract philosophical concerns.

The Guardian: Russia may face second round of sanctions over Ukraine

Barack Obama and his European Union allies have unveiled a co-ordinated set of sanctions to punish Russia for occupying Crimea, imposing visa restrictions on individuals and sharpening rhetoric in what has rapidly degenerated into the worst east-west crisis since the cold war.

Yves here. This post is useful because the issues Varoufakis raises are orthogonal to most of the discussion in the English language press over Ukraine.

By Yanis Varoufakis, a professor of economics at the University of Athens. Cross posted from his blog

Let us accept (as I do) the principle that national minorities have the right to self-determination within lopsided multi-ethnic states; e.g. Croats and Kosovars seceding from Yugoslavia, Scots from the UK, Georgians from the Soviet Union etc.

Awkward question no. 1: On what principle can we deny, once Croatia, Kosovo, Scotland and Georgia have come into being, the right of Krajina Serbs, of Mitrovica Serbs, of Shetland Islanders and of Abkhazians to carve out, if they so wish, their own nation-states within the newly independent nation-states in the areas where they constitute a clear majority?

Awkward question no. 2: On what principle does a western liberal deny the right of Chechens to independence from Russia, but is prepared to defend to the hilt the Georgians’ or the Ukrainians’ right to self-determination?

Awkward question no. 3: On what principle is it justifiable that the West acquiesced to the raising to the ground of Grozny (Chechnya’s capital), not to mention the tens of thousands of civilian deaths, but responded fiercely, threatened with global sanctions, and raised the spectre of a major Cold War-like confrontation over the (so far) bloodless deployment of undercover Russian troops in Crimea?

The above three questions are being asked not because I want to challenge the notion that Mr Putin is a dangerous despot. I have no doubt that he is. Indeed, I wear as a badge of honour the fact that I was in a minority of one in the Faculty Board meeting of the University of Athens in 2003, where I voted against the award of an honourary doctoral degree to Mr Putin by the University of Athens (denying the University the opportunity to state that the award had been unanimous, and thus incurring the wrath of most colleagues who had been ‘requested’ politely by the Greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs to honour Mr Putin during his visit to Athens).

My three awkward questions have two aims: To remind readers of the West’s unprincipled attitude toward ‘other’ people’s struggles and tragedies. And to explain, in part, why such unprincipled behavior by the proponents of democratic principles ends up denigrating not only these very principles but greatly reinforcing the power and influence of the Putins of this world as well.

Europe and the Ukraine

Ukrainians fought pitched battles against the security forces in Kiev’s main square to protest against the former President Yanukovic’s decision to back out of a deal that would seal the country’s partnership with the European Union. Why? Are they blind to the incongruities of the European Union?

No, they are not. However, Ukrainians are facing a different type of problem compared to those we Europeans do. Whatever bone we have to pick with Brussels, with the ECB etc. (and we have many!), the people of Kiev had other priorities. E.g. how to rid themselves of security forces that felt at liberty to torture and to kill; how to travel freely; how to live in a country where courts were not completely run by the same mafia that run the state apparatus. To them, the fact that democracy is on the wane in the Eurozone and Europe’s principles are becoming increasingly hollow, matters little: The EU, however fast it may be descending into democratic illegitimacy, still looks like Heaven through many Ukrainian eyes.

Having said that, the greatest tragedy for Ukrainians is that their highest hopes are resting on weak shoulders: the European Union’s!

‘Europe’s Foreign Policy’ are three words that only need to be stated to cause hilarity. For there is no such thing, in truth. Even the Franco-German axis has been shuttered by Libya, let alone the ambitious idea of a common foreign policy for a United Europe that can act as a bulwark helpful to the Ukraine.

While Libya was of minimal importance to Europe’s security, even if of crucial importance to the Libyans, Ukraine is crucial and Europe ought to tread very carefully. What worries me the most is that the seriousness of the Ukrainian crisis is in inverse proportion to Europe’s competence in the field of foreign policy. Brussels may be keen to expand its ‘authority’ Eastward but it is treading into dangerous territory, ill equipped to deal with the repercussions.

The United States, the IMF, Germany and the Ukraine

The Ukraine is, and was always going to be, the battleground between Russia’s industrial neo-feudalism, the US State Department’s ambitions, and Germany’s neo-Lebensraum policies. Various ‘Eurasianists’ see the crisis in Kiev as a great opportunity to promote a program of full confrontation with Russia, one that is reminiscent of Z. Brzezinski’s 1970s anti-Soviet strategy. Importantly, they also see the Ukraine as an excellent excuse to torpedo America’s role in normalising relations with Iran and minimising the human cost in Syria. At the same time, the IMF cannot wait to enter Russia’s underbelly with a view to imposing another ‘stabilization-and-structural-adjustment program’ that will bring that whole part of the former Soviet Union under its purview. As for Germany, it has its own agenda which pulls its in two different directions at once: securing as much of the former Soviet Union as part of its neo-Lebensraum strategy of expanding its market/industrial space Eastwards; while, at the same time, preserving its privileged access to gas supplies from Gazprom.

As for the White House itself, there is little doubt that both President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry understand the limits of Western power and the danger that too much of a hawkish reaction to the events in the Ukraine will undermine their efforts vis-à-vis Syria and Iran, at a time when Iraq is being increasingly destabilised.

Epilogue: The European Union should stop meddling in the Ukraine

In this geopolitical context, Brussels’ ambitions ought to be curtailed. The European Commission is clueless, regarding the goings on in the Ukraine, and the less involved they get the better for everyone. Indeed, the EU apparatchiks resemble Rome’s last emperors who, foolishly, thought that extending the Empire’s borders was all that mattered, when in reality the problem was that the Empire’s core was rotting.